ArticleThe British journal of radiology2016
Costs associated with evaluation of incidental breast lesions identified on computed tomography.
Article in The British journal of radiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe purpose of this study was to calculate the costs associated with the evaluation of breast incidentalomas (BI) identified on CT.
methodsAll CT scans of the thorax performed at the radiological department of the University Hospital of the Martin-Luther-University Halle-Wittenberg between the years 2006 and 2014 were reanalysed retrospectively. 111 patients with BI were identified. The radiological and clinical reports of these cases were examined, and the costs of all further diagnostic procedures performed to clarify the detected BI were calculated.
resultsIn 31 (27.9%) of the 111 patients, BI were not further investigated. Of the remaining 80 (72.1%) cases of BI, primary breast carcinoma was diagnosed in 10 (12.5%) cases, breast involvement by lymphoma in 7 (8.8%) cases, intramammary metastases in 19 (23.7%) cases and different benign findings in 44 (55.0%) cases. The total costs associated with clarification of BI in our institution (n = 53) amounted to €14,045.71. The costs per BI were €265.01 and per newly identified breast cancer €1560.63.
conclusionBreast lesions incidentally detected on CT should be categorized as major incidental findings because of the high frequency of malignancy. The radiologist should carefully evaluate the breast on CT images and all identified BI should be clarified. The clarification of BI is associated with a low economic burden in comparison with screening programmes for primary breast cancer. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: The radiologist should carefully evaluate the breast on CT and all identified BI should be clarified. The evaluation of BI is associated with a low economic burden.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.